Read v. Webster
Supreme Court of Vermont
Action op Tort for the unlawful flooding of plaintiff’s land by means of a dam maintained by the defendants. Answer, general denial and prescriptive right. Trial by jury at the March Term, 1920, Franklin County, Moulton, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendants excepted. The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the CourtTaylor, J.
The plaintiff, as administrator of Ephraim S. Read’s estate, brings this action in tort for the unlawful flooding of land owned by his intestate in his lifetime by means of a dam maintained by the defendants on Black Creek, in the town of Fairfield. The trial was by jury, with verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendants own a sawmill and mill privilege, and the dam in question furnishes the power for their mill. They acquired title to the mill and privilege January 2, 1902, from the estate of R. S. Read. It did not appear when the mill was first built, but a dam of some character…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Lipsky v. HellerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- Harwood v. Benton & JonesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1860
- Bailey v. HennesseyWashington Supreme Court · 1920
- Dee v. KingSupreme Court of Vermont · 1901
- Fitzell v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Sandra J. Hartke v. Dr. William McKelway Sandra J. Hartke v. Dr. William McKelwayCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1983
- Olson v. MullenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Romanchuk v. PlotkinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
- Traders, Inc. v. BartholomewSupreme Court of Vermont · 1983
- Tallarico v. BrettSupreme Court of Vermont · 1979
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.